Portal vein reconstruction in adult living donor liver transplantation for patients with portal vein thrombosis in single center experience

Meta-analysis and systematic review: Prevalence, graft failure, mortality, and post-operative thrombosis in liver transplant recipients with pre-operative portal vein thrombosis

AIMS

This study seeks to evaluate the association between pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and overall survival, graft failure, waitlist mortality, and post-operative PVT after liver transplantation.

METHODS

A conventional pairwise meta-analysis between patients with and without pre-transplant PVT was conducted using hazard ratios or odds ratios where appropriate.

RESULTS

Prevalence of preoperative PVT was 11.6% (CI 9.70-13.7%). Pre-operative PVT was associated with increased overall mortality (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.27-1.65) and graft loss (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34-1.85). In particular, grade 3 (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00-2.51) and 4 (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.45-3.45) PVT significantly increased mortality, but not grade 1 or 2 PVT. Patients with PVT receiving living donor (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.24-1.91) and deceased donor (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.21-1.92) liver transplantation had increased mortality, with no significant difference between transplant types (P = .13). Furthermore, pre-transplant PVT was associated with higher occurrence of post-transplant PVT (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.89-6.57). Waitlist mortality was not significantly increased in patients with pre-transplant PVT.

CONCLUSION

Graft failure, mortality, and post-operative PVT are more common in pre-transplant PVT patients, especially in grade 3 or 4 PVT. Prophylactic anticoagulation can be considered to reduce re-thrombosis and improve survival.

Modified Cavoportal Hemitransposition for Severe Portal Vein Thrombosis Contributed to Long-term Survival After Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation-Insight Into Portal Modulation for Improving Survival: A Case Report

BACKGROUND

Severe/massive portal vein thrombosis (PVT) deteriorates peri-liver transplantation outcomes. Cavoportal hemitransposition (CPHT) is a rescue procedure for severe PVT, and short-term outcomes have been well studied. However, CPHT is associated with some long-term issues caused by portal flow modulation via extraordinary reconstruction. We describe a patient with Yerdel grade 4 PVT who underwent a liver transplant and achieved long-term survival with CPHT and a portosystemic shunt.

CASE REPORT

A 50-year-old man with liver cirrhosis underwent a deceased donor liver transplant. Preoperative examinations indicated Yerdel grade 4 PVT; thus, we planned a CPHT. In liver transplant surgery, we confirmed diffusely complete PVT and removed them as possible. After placing a liver graft, we performed CPHT and confirmed that the graft received sufficient portal vein flow. However, the gastroepiploic vein pressure increased significantly. Therefore, we added a portosystemic shunt between the splenic vein and the inferior vena cava, and the pressure improved. The patient was discharged after an uneventful hospital stay, and he reported no unfavorable events for over 12 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This case study suggested that a modified CPHT with a portosystemic shunt for Grade 4 PVT was useful in preventing post-liver transplant PVT development and improved the outcome.

Risk Factors and Outcome of Portal Vein Thrombosis After Laparoscopic and Open Hepatectomy for Primary Liver Cancer: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Post-hepatectomy portal vein thrombosis (PH-PVT) is a severe complication. The risk factors of PH-PVT after laparoscopic and open hepatectomy have not been clarified yet. We aimed to retrospectively investigate the risk factors and outcome of PH-PVT in patients with primary liver cancer.

METHODS

We enrolled 622 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy in our hospital between January 2006 and August 2016.

RESULTS

Of 21 patients (3.4%) with PH-PVT, 7 had grade I; 13, grade II; and 1, grade III. The patients with PH-PVT were significantly older than those without PH-PVT. Of the 413 patients who underwent open hepatectomy, those who underwent a major right hepatectomy (4.1%) had a slightly higher incidence of PH-PVT. Of the 209 patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy, those who underwent a left lateral sectionectomy (21.2%) and major right hepatectomy (16.7%) had high incidence rates of PH-PVT. The treatment was only observation in five patients, medication with an antithrombotic drug in 15 patients, and reoperation in one patient. PH-PVT diminished in 17 patients. Cavernous transformation and/or stenosis of the portal vein developed in three patients. The patient with grade III PH-PVT after open right hemihepatectomy underwent reoperation but died of hepatic failure.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that patient age, left lateral sectionectomy were risk factors of PH-PVT. Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy and major right hepatectomy might bring about relatively higher risk of PH-PVT. Major right hepatectomy tends to lead to severe PH-PVT. Careful handling of the PV during hepatectomy and early treatment of PH-PVT are necessary.

Feasibility and mid- to long-term results of endovascular treatment for portal vein thrombosis after living-donor liver transplantation

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate mid- to long-term results of endovascular treatment for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) after living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

METHODS

Thirty cases (14 males, 16 females; age range, 0.67-65 years) who underwent endovascular treatment including thrombolysis, angioplasty, stent placement, and/or collateral embolization for PVT after LDLT from 2001 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical and procedural data were collected and analyzed regarding the patency of the PVT site at the last follow-up date (PVT-free persistency) using Log-rank test. Results were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 120 months. The technical success rate was 80% (n=24). Patency rates at 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 12, 36, and 60 months were 73%, 59%, 55%, 51%, 51%, 51%, and 51% for primary patency and 80%, 70%, 66%, 66%, 66%, 61%, and 61% for assisted patency after secondary endovascular treatment. PVT-free persistency rates regarding the subgroups were as follows: children under 12 years vs. adults, 50% vs. 68% (P = 0.42); acute vs. nonacute, 76% vs. 46% (P = 0.10); localized vs. extensive, 90% vs. 50% (P = 0.035); transileocolic approach vs. percutaneous-transhepatic approach, 71% vs. 54% (P = 0.39); and thrombolysis-based treatment vs. non-thrombolysis-based treatment, 71% vs. 44% (P = 0.12), respectively. Among technically successful cases, PVT-free persistency rate was 94% for those with hepatopetal flow in the peripheral portal vein vs. 17% for those without hepatopetal flow (P < 0.001). The only major complication occurring was pleural hemorrhage (n=1). Minor complications (i.e., fever) occurred in 18 patients (60%).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, mid- to long-term portal patency following endovascular treatment was approximately 50%-60% in PVT patients after LDLT. PVT site patency over three months after the first endovascular treatment, localized PVT, and hepatopetal flow in the peripheral portal vein were identified as key prognostic factors for mid- to long-term portal patency.

Liver transplantation in patients with portal vein thrombosis: A strategic road map throughout management

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation in the setting of portal vein thrombosis is an intricate issue that occasionally necessitates extraordinary procedures for portal flow restoration. However, to date, there is no consensus on a persistent management strategy, particularly with extensive forms. This work aims to introduce our experience-based surgical management algorithm for portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation and to clarify some of the debatable circumstances associated with this problematic issue.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2019, 494 adults underwent liver transplantation at our institute. Ninety patients had preoperative portal vein thrombosis, and 79 patients underwent living donor liver transplantation. Our algorithm trichotomized the management plan into 3 pathways based on portal vein thrombosis grade. The surgical procedures implemented included thrombectomy, interposition vein grafts, jump grafts from the superior mesenteric vein, jump grafts from a collateral and renoportal anastomosis in 56, 13, 11, 4, and 2 patients, respectively. Four patients with mural thrombi did not require any special intervention.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients experienced posttransplant portal vein complications. They all proved to have a patent portal vein by the end of follow-up regardless of the management modality. No significant survival difference was observed between cohorts with versus without portal vein thrombosis. The early graft loss rate was significantly higher with advanced grades (P = .048) as well as technically demanding procedures (P = .032).

CONCLUSION

A stepwise broad-minded strategy should always be adopted when approaching advanced portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation. An industrious preoperative evaluation should always be carried out to locate the ideal reliable source for portal flow restoration.

Massive Pulmonary Artery Thromboembolism in a Liver Transplant Recipient: Case Study and Literature Review

The hypercoagulable state in liver transplant recipients that may manifest as abnormal thrombus formation in large vessel structures, such as cardiac chambers and the pulmonary arteries, poses a substantial threat for the patient and graft survival. Massive pulmonary embolism is a rare, albeit potentially lethal, complication that may occur at any stage of liver transplant surgery. In this study, we present the case of a major perioperative thromboembolic event in a liver transplant recipient that had taken place in the early post-transplant period during the second-look surgery that was then successfully treated by catheter-directed clot removal. We will attempt to identify potential factors that may have been associated with abnormal thrombus formation.

Tailored classification of portal vein thrombosis for liver transplantation: Focus on strategies for portal vein inflow reconstruction

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is currently not considered a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT), but diffuse or complicated PVT remains a major surgical challenge. Here, we review the prevalence, natural course and current grading systems of PVT and propose a tailored classification of PVT in the setting of LT. PVT in liver transplant recipients is classified into three types, corresponding to three portal reconstruction strategies: Anatomical, physiological and non-physiological. Type I PVT can be removed via low dissection of the portal vein (PV) or thrombectomy; porto-portal anastomosis is then performed with or without an interposed vascular graft. Physiological reconstruction used for type II PVT includes vascular interposition between mesenteric veins and PV, collateral-PV and splenic vein-PV anastomosis. Non-physiological reconstruction used for type III PVT includes cavoportal hemitransposition, renoportal anastomosis, portal vein arterialization and multivisceral transplantation. All portal reconstruction techniques were reviewed. This tailored classification system stratifies PVT patients by surgical complexity, risk of postoperative complications and long-term survival. We advocate using the tailored classification for PVT grading before LT, which will urge transplant surgeons to make a better preoperative planning and pay more attention to all potential strategies for portal reconstruction. Further verification in a large-sample cohort study is needed.

Surgical Procedures of Portal Vein Reconstruction for Recipients With Portal Vein Thrombosis in Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Portal vein (PV) reconstruction is an important surgical skill for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), especially for patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). However, this technique remains a critical problem in LDLT because of technical demands and requirements for appropriate venous graft harvesting. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical procedure used for PV reconstruction and outcomes in LDLT recipients with PVT.

METHODS

Between March 2002 and December 2018, 128 adult LDLTs were performed. Fourteen recipients (10.8%) had PVT at the time of LDLT, classified as grade I in 2, grade II in 5, grade III in 6, and grade IV in 1, according to the Yerdel classification. We retrospectively analyzed the surgical procedure and postoperative complications associated with PV reconstruction of recipients with PVT.

RESULTS

Surgical treatments for 14 recipients with PVT were as follows: thrombectomies in 2 recipients, replacement of interpositional venous grafts using the internal jugular vein (IJV) in 3 recipients and the external iliac vein (EIV) in 6 recipients, mesoportal jump grafts using the IJV in 1 recipient and the IJV + EIV in 1 recipient, and renoportal anastomosis using the EIV in 1 recipient. Among interpositional venous grafts, 5 venous grafts (IJV: 2, EIV: 3) passed the dorsal side of the pancreas without using the jump graft. Postoperative complications associated with PV anastomosis occurred in 1 of 14 (7.1%) recipients, who developed anastomosis bleeding caused by coagulation disorders at 27 days after LDLT, without any strictures of PV anastomoses. The overall survival rate at 5 years posttransplant was not statistically different between recipients with and without PVT (50.0% vs 65.0%, P = .163).

CONCLUSION

Our techniques of PV reconstruction, using the appropriate venous grafts and route, are feasible, resulting in a prognosis comparable to that of recipients without PVT.

"U-shaped" mesoportal jump graft to manage portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation: A case report

•

Portal vein thrombosis increases the technical difficulty of liver transplantation.

•

Surgical technique should be adapted to the extent of thrombosis, presence of collaterals and of porto-systemic shunts.

•

In particular cases, a mesoportal jump graft obtained using iliac bifurcation may represent a valuable technical option.

Introduction

Once considered a contraindication to liver transplantation, portal vein thrombosis still represents a significant challenge to the liver transplant surgeon. Yerdel grade 3 thrombosis is usually managed by interposing a donor iliac vein jump graft between graft portal vein and distal superior mesenteric vein. Venous patch is normally placed in a retrogastric position to avoid its kinking.

Presentation of case

We report a new technical variant of standard mesoportal jump graft, in which a U-shaped graft was obtained using iliac bifurcation. This technique was used to manage a case of grade 3 portal vein thrombosis in which portal vein was unsuitable due to severe pylephlebitis and pylorus dissection had to be abandoned due to inflammatory changes issue of chronic pancreatitis. The venous patch was of sufficient length and shape to bypass pancreatic head and first duodenum, avoiding the need for its retrogastric placement and pylorus dissection.

Discussion

This case is a further demonstration that technical approach to portal vein thrombosis must be tailored according to its extent and surgical scenario. In selected cases, use of a curved U-shaped jump graft may represent a valuable option.

Conclusion

This technical option should be included among options for the management of portal vein thrombosis and be part of the armamentarium of liver transplant surgeon.

Extensive Thrombectomy as a Legitimate Strategy in Living Donor Liver Transplantation With Advanced Portal Vein Thrombosis

Management of portal vein thrombosis (PVT), especially advanced PVT involving the superior mesenteric vein (SMV), in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is challenging. There were 514 adults who underwent LDLT between 2005 and 2018 included in this retrospective study, and PVT was observed in 67 (13.0%) patients. The LDLT recipients with PVT were characterized by increased portal pressure at laparotomy (26.1 ± 6.0 versus 24.3 ± 5.9 mm Hg; P = 0.03) and at closure (16.8 ± 3.9 versus 15.6 ± 3.6 mm Hg; P = 0.02), increased operative blood loss (14.6 ± 29.7 versus 5.7 ± 6.3 L; P < 0.01), and decreased 1-year graft survival (83.5% versus 92.8%; P = 0.04). Among the 18 patients with atrophic or vanished portal vein on pre-LDLT computed tomography, significant portal atrophy was actually observed only in 1 (5.6%) patient during LDLT surgery. For advanced PVT (n = 7) involving SMV in era 1, we performed nonanatomical inflow reconstruction using interposition grafts, resulting in significant inflow problems in 4 (57.1%) patients. Thus, for the patients with advanced PVT (n = 4) in era 2, we abandoned nonanatomical reconstruction and applied extensive thrombectomy under ultrasound guidance with secure shunt ligation, resulting in no inflow problems and no graft loss. In conclusion, even for advanced PVT involving SMV, extensive thrombectomy under sonogram guidance followed by anatomical inflow reconstruction and shunt ligation is a legitimate strategy in adult LDLT with PVT.

Successful Living-Donor Liver Transplantation With Intraoperative Endovascular Recanalization via Transsplenic Access in a Recipient With Grade III Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Case Report

Extensive portosplenomesenteric thrombosis is regarded as a relative contraindication to liver transplantation because of the complexity of the surgical procedure. This report describes a case of living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for a patient with extensive portosplenomesenteric thrombosis, in whom portal flow was successfully restored by intraoperative transplenic portal vein and superior mesenteric vein stenting after surgical thrombectomy. The patient's liver function remained normal with a patent portal vein stent 6 months after LDLT, and Doppler ultrasonography demonstrated a normal wave form for portal flow. To the best of our knowledge, this is the world's first case of endovascular management of the portal vein via percutaneous transsplenic access during LDLT, demonstrating that transsplenic access can be an alternative approach without liver graft injury when the superior mesenteric vein branch and inferior mesenteric vein cannot be used as access routes.

Outcomes of Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients with Preoperative Portal Vein Problems

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication for patients with end-stage liver disease. The presence of PVT used to be a contraindication to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of preoperative PVT on perioperative and long-term outcomes of the recipients after LDLT.

METHODS

We reviewed the data of patients who underwent LDLT during the period between 2004 till 2017.

RESULTS

During the study period, 500 cases underwent LDLT. Patients were divided into three groups. Group I included non-PVT, 446 patients (89.2%); group II included attenuated PV, 26 patients (5.2%); and group III included PVT, 28 patients (5.6%). Higher incidence of hematemesis and encephalopathy was detected in PVT (p = 0.001). Longer anhepatic phase was found in PVT (p = 0.013). There were no significant differences between regarding operation time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, ICU, and hospital stay. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of non-PVT were 80.5%, 77.7%, and 75%, and for attenuated PV were 84.6%, 79.6%, and 73.5%, and for PVT were 88.3%, 64.4%, and 64.4%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding OS rates (logrank 0.793).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative PVT increases the complexity of LDLT operation, but it does not reduce the OS rates of such patients.

Perioperative thromboprophylaxis in liver transplant patients

Improvements in surgical and anesthetic procedures have increased patient survival after liver transplantation (LT). However, the perioperative period of LT can still be affected by several complications. Among these, thromboembolic complications (intracardiac thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, hepatic artery and portal vein thrombosis) are relatively common causes of increased morbidity and mortality. The benefit of thromboprophylaxis in general surgical patients has already been established, but it is not the standard of care in LT recipients. LT is associated with a high bleeding risk, as it is performed in a setting of already unstable hemostasis. For this reason, the role of routine perioperative prophylactic anticoagulation is usually restricted. However, recent data have shown that the bleeding tendency of cirrhotic patients is not an expression of an acquired bleeding disorder but rather of coexisting factors (portal hypertension, hypervolemia and infections). Furthermore, in cirrhotic patients, the new paradigm of ‘‘rebalanced hemostasis’’ can easily tip towards hypercoagulability because of the recently described enhanced thrombin generation, procoagulant changes in fibrin structure and platelet hyperreactivity. This new coagulation balance, along with improvements in surgical techniques and critical support, has led to a dramatic reduction in transfusion requirements, and the intraoperative thromboembolic-favoring factors (venous stasis, vessels clamping, surgical injury) have increased the awareness of thrombotic complications and led clinicians to reconsider the limited use of anticoagulants or antiplatelets in the postoperative period of LT.

Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation for Patients With Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Single-center Experience

Background

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is associated with several technical challenges for its complicated procedures and poor outcomes. Some institutions still consider preexisting PVT as a relatively contraindication for LDLT.

Methods

Between April 2010 and May 2016, 129 adults underwent LDLT at our institution, and 28 (21.7%) of whom had preexisting PVT. Portal vein thrombosis was diagnosed using preoperative imaging techniques and intraoperative findings. The characteristics and outcomes of the cases were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

The type of PVT included Yerdel grade 1 in 21 (75.0%) cases, grade 2 in 3 (10.7%) cases, and grade 3 in 4 (14.3%) cases. There were no cases of Yerdel grade 4 PVT. After removing thrombus inside the vessel, we performed simple portal vein anastomosis in 25 (89.3%) cases, patch technique with vascular graft in 1 case (3.6%), and an interposition technique with vascular graft in 2 cases (7.1%). Compared with the non-PVT group, cold ischemic time was longer (P = 0.012) and the rate of postoperative PVT was higher (P = 0.001) in PVT group. In the comparison between the recipient without and with postoperative PVT, the existence of preoperative PVT was the independent risk factor in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 7.511; 95% confidence interval 1.382-40.820; P = 0.020).

Conclusions

Although it had a technically complicated operation, LDLT could be safely performed in the patients with PVT in our institution.

Extra-Anatomic Jump Graft from the Right Colic Vein: A Novel Technique to Manage Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Transplantation

Background

In the context of cirrhosis, portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is present in 2.1% to 26% of patients. PVT is no longer considered an absolute contraindication for liver transplantation, and nowadays, surgical strategies depend on the extent of PVT. Complete PVT is associated with higher morbidity rates and poor prognosis, while comparable long-term outcomes can be achieved as long as physiological portal inflow is restored.

Materials and Methods

We report our experience with a 45-year-old patient undergoing liver transplant with a PVT (stage III-b). To restore portal vein inflow to the liver, an extra-anatomic jump graft from the right colic vein with donor iliac vein interposition was constructed.

Results

The patient recovered well, with a progressive improvement of the general conditions, and was finally discharged on p.o.d. 14. No anastomotic defects were found at the postoperative CT scan 10 months after the surgery.

Conclusion

Our technical innovation represents a valid and safe alternative to the cavoportal hemitransposition, providing a proper flow restoration and reproducing a physiological setting, while avoiding the complications related to the cavoportal shunt. We believe that the reconstitution of liver portal inflow should be obtained with the most physiological approach possible and considering long-term liver function.

Portal vein reconstruction using vein grafts in pediatric living donor liver transplantation: Current status

PV reconstruction is an important aspect of LDLT, with post-transplant outcomes depending on PV reconstruction methods. However, it is unclear whether the preferential selection of these techniques is dependent on preoperative recipient characteristics. This retrospective study assessed whether preoperative recipient factors differed in pediatric patients who did and did not receive VGs for PV reconstruction. Of 113 pediatric patients who underwent LDLT from January 2010 to July 2015, 31 (27%) underwent PV reconstruction with VGs and the other 82 (73%) without VGs. The presence of collateral vessels (P<.0001) and ascites (P=.02); PV size (P<.001), thrombosis (P=.01) and the direction of flow (P=.01), Child-Pugh class A vs B/C liver function (P=.01), Alb concentration (P=.02), primary diagnosis: BA vs non-BA (P=.03), and previous abdominal surgery (P<.005) differed significantly in patients who did and did not receive VGs for PV reconstruction. PV complications, patient survival, and graft survival did not differ significantly in patients with and without VGs at 1-year follow-up. VGs should be harvested for recipients with pretransplant hypoplastic PV, intense collaterals, hepatofugal flow, poor liver status, or previous abdominal surgery.

Nontumoral portal vein thrombosis in patients awaiting liver transplantation

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) occurs in approximately 2%-26% of the patients awaiting liver transplantation (LT) and is no longer an absolute contraindication for LT. Nearly half of PVT cases are accidentally found during the LT procedure. The most important risk factor for PVT development in cirrhosis may be the severity of liver disease and reduced portal blood flow. Whether other inherited or acquired coagulation disorders also play a role is not yet clear. The development of PVT may have no effect on the liver disease progression, especially when it is nonocclusive. PVT may not increase the risk of wait-list mortality, but it is a risk factor for poor early post-LT mortality. Anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) are 2 major treatment strategies for patients with PVT on the waiting list. The complete recanalization rate after anticoagulation is approximately 40%. The role of TIPS to maintain PV patency for LT as the primary indication has been reported, but the safety and efficacy should be further evaluated. PVT extension and degree may determine the surgical technique to be used during LT. If a "conventional" end-to-end portal anastomotic technique is used, there is not a major impact on post-LT survival. Post-LT PVT can significantly reduce both graft and patient survival after LT and can preclude future options for re-LT.

Systemic Venous Inflow to the Liver Allograft to Overcome Diffuse Splanchnic Venous Thrombosis

Diffuse splanchnic venous thrombosis (DSVT), formerly defined as contraindication for liver transplantation (LT), is a serious challenge to the liver transplant surgeon. Portal vein arterialisation, cavoportal hemitransposition and renoportal anastomosis, and finally combined liver and small bowel transplantation are all possible alternatives to deal with this condition. Five patients with preoperatively confirmed extensive splanchnic venous thrombosis were transplanted using cavoportal hemitransposition (4x) and renoportal anastomosis (1x). Median follow-up was 58 months (range: 0,5 to 130 months). Two patients with previous radiation-induced peritoneal injury died, respectively, 18 days and 2 months after transplantation. The three other patients had excellent long-term survival, despite the fact that two of them needed a surgical reintervention for severe gastrointestinal bleeding. Extensive splanchnic venous thrombosis is no longer an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation. Although cavoportal hemitransposition and renoportal anastomosis undoubtedly are life-saving procedures allowing for ensuring adequate allograft portal flow, careful follow-up of these patients remains necessary as both methods are unable to completely eliminate the complications of (segmental) portal hypertension.